Repub candidates can win against Dems without standing for anything, but they will not get the opportunity if someone better is in the primary. A lot of people know what they want AND what they don't.

There are unfortunately many who are not too clear about it. The Independent block is full of them. They are the real problem with getting effective reform done. No mandate is possible from people who have no clue or an affiliation borrow one from.

-Our President was essentially elected on Change and I'm not George Bush, so clearly substance doesn't drive election (now governing is a different thing entirely)

-(Quote from the article):McConnell blasted President Obama and the Democrats for overspending and overreaching . There you go:Govern within our means and don't look to government as the "first resort"

-much like the discussion yesterday (and speaking as someone who is pro-life), lets not argue over the color of the drapes when the house is on fire. Our house (or at least our kids house) is on fire. And so gay marraige should not be our prime message nor should we be fussing over immigration reform

A major reason "establishment" Republicans are on the way out, is that they are still suffering from "Roosevelt shock," think the Democrats are smarter than they are, and that moderate success, which is all Republicans can hope for, lies in imitating the Democrats.

I think that strategy could work for Republican candidates who are like Scott Brown in that they have personality, likeability and good looks. Brown said he'd be a "no" vote against Obamacare and he complained about deficit spending and he said he'd support the military, but aside from that, I think he mainly rose in popularity as the Democrat nominee destroyed her candidacy.

Unfortunately, I live in Nevada, where Sharron Angle is running against Harry Reid. Reid is not popular here at all, and the governor's race--where the rather bland but telegenic Brian Sandoval has a huge lead over Rory Reid--could be read as a proxy for what would happen had the Republicans here nominated someone more in the Scott Brown mold to run against the elder Reid. Instead, Harry Reid has just taken a lead in the latest polling because Sharron Angle says too many things that need to be explained, and he's succeeded in making Sharron Angle an issue.

Republicans had better stand for something and it had better be pretty close to Tea Party principles. People aren't in love with the Republican party and will vote for anyone who is a sincere advocate of smaller government, regardless of party.

Depends on who runs - someone like Sarah..I'm just wondering if there ARE any ideas?

Sarah:I could while away the hours, conferrin' with the flowersConsultin' with the rain.And my head I'd be scratchin' while my thoughts were busy hatchin'If I only had a brain.I'd unravel every riddle for any individ'le,In trouble or in pain.

Mitt:With the thoughts you'll be thinkin' you could be another LincolnIf you only had a brain.

They need to keep the message simple - jobs, economy. Then just play clips of Democrats the rest of the time.

Since the left has been frothing at the mouth for the last 10 years and their last bastion resort of crying "RACIST" at anything that moves has been worn out, I'd like to see the Repubs actually go on the offensive for once. All the nicey-nice bullshit has been a losing strategy and I want to see what news lows the left can sink to.

Synova said..."But I think that small government and fiscal restraint are ideas. How do those things not count as ideas."

because they aren't they are merely observations without any "how" attached to them.

I want to solve social security but it is the "how" that is ALWAYS missing. I don't like Obama's health bill. .. well what do you propose? nothing? that's not a solution.

The GOP runs on soundbites without answers and the nation woke up to it last time around. They will again if the right wing and the tea party don't shout them off the stage - another observation without a solution.

First, should Republicans promote a political platform, or just run as anti-Democrats?

Second, if a platform is going to be promoted, what should it be?

These are simple questions. But its amazing to me that Republicans don't even have the clarity of mind to straightforwardly ask them and debate the answers. Instead they act like pompous entitled thugs, engaging in content-less showmanship that makes them look like total assholes.

Except for Gingrich. He's an unattractive fat man with lots of baggage, but he does seem to get it.

Republicans have proposed plenty of alternatives but you never seem to extract your head from your ass long enough to find this most basic of information out. Try a different talking point, this one is like you - all used up.

Republicans have proposed plenty of alternatives but you never seem to extract your head from your ass long enough to find this most basic of information out.

Well, this is the major problem with the Washington Post story to begin with -- the entire premise is BS. But Post reporters would never know that because they are too busy in their JournoList, etc. echo-chamber deluding themselves about the world.

Conservative ideas are counter-intuitive for most people. The idea that you can fix problems in a society by not trying to fix everything, is hard for most. If they were making diner, and any good at it, this idea would be obvious.

The idea that the best gift you can give some people is the word "no". That expecting people to take care of themselves is an act of respect and a gift with incredible power that can change their lives permanently for the better and those they effect in return.

The idea that support for all freedom everywhere is not optional anymore than is the free speech of a lone citizen in your own public square.

That violence against evil is the opposite of attacking the innocent, not just another form that must be avoided to be pure and good.

This are old ideas, but nearly every idea is. What they are not, is understood and respected as they should be by people who claim or wish to be free.

There's nothing inherently wrong with new ideas, per say. However, I believe the cures to our ills lie more in getting back to fundamentals rather than reaching into the political/economic theory stratosphere.

This isn't to say things were just peaches in days of yore, but it is to say that, fundamentally, you CANNOT spend more than you take in...period. You can not, fundamentally, continue to fleece the producers for the non-producers.

All they need do is promise to repeal or defund every single thing Obama has done since taking office and that is enough. It would be nice if they could impeach or imprison a bunch of the bastards who got us here but that is too much to hope. If we can cut off their funding and impoverish them it would be less than they deserve.

Really, what we have seen in recent years is nothing less than the death of liberty worldwide. There is not a single place left where a man can go and have even as much freedom as each of us in the US had when we were children. It is accepted that governments shall make all of our choices for us and there is no realm left where it cannot intrude. This obviously can't continue.

Bankrupting the country is one thing. Everyone expects this of their government. It is the normal course of action in all spheres for governments to destroy that which good a decent men have built. It is what governments do.

Discarding the legacy of our forefathers though in exchange for the failed platitudes of Marx... I guess we will see how much the blood has thinned since the country was founded.

I don't care so much for myself. I built a business and made enough money to be comfortable. But I know that such a thing is no longer possible for my daughter. The barriers to entry are too high and getting higher with every act Congress takes. The country has changed too much and no one may succeed without the government's say so. And for the few who succeed despite the odds the government can take all they have on a whim. The surest path to success is to be a crony or a lackey... as long as you curry the fickle favor of the right political master. But such a state is the terminal phase for any country.

Whatever America was and whatever it was meant to be it no longer is and shall not be again until we start over from scratch. There are no u-turns on the road to serfdom. You have to start over and hack your own trail through the wilderness if you wish to be free.

If you read HDHouse and other liberals you would think America is on the verge of a Bolshevik Revolution. Nice to drink their kool-aid. Obama tries to play class warfare today about the unemployment benefits extension. But polls show most of the American people are against it.

Try the big three Ann Coulter enumerated... favor life, lower taxes, and maintain a strong national defense. These are the basis for a free society that permits the pursuit of happiness instead of the pursuit of a Police State.

Both parties are treasonous, and allowed 2 unconstitutional, ineligible, Non Natural Born Citizens to get on the 2008 balot. McCain was born in Colon, Panama, and Obama's father was never a citizen. Both were subject to the jurisdiction of a foreign country at their birth, and as such are not Natural Born.

Also liberal opinion writers are completely out of touch with the American people. People really are concerned about the deficits and don't want to be dismissed as "anti-deficit hysteria". The more the liberals(Ritmo, that's you) keep up the insulting rhetoric the more badly they'll lose in November.

Let's keep our feet on the ground here, folks. First of all, this is an article in the Washington Post, which is not exactly a fan of Republicans.

Dead Julius is amazed "that Republicans don't even have the clarity of mind to straightforwardly ask them and debate the answers." So let me ask you, Julie, is it that they don't have the clarity of mind, or is that the Post reports it as though Republicans are all confused?

At any rate, every Republican candidate has his or her own election to worry about, and is fundamentally responsible for developing his or her own strategy. Some will win handily by nationalizing the election and running against Reid or Pelosi. Others may feel the need to offer specific positions on specific issues as part of their strategy. This is normal.

But at the national level it will certainly make sense to argue the point that every Democrat who is elected to the House is one more vote to continue with Nancy Pelosi as Speaker.

New etc...Why are you so helpful to the GOP midgets again. Did you also tell the Butler team to forget showing up at this year's NCAA Basketball Tournament? Victory in 2012 will not happen by a computer model prediction or by a divination answer. The victory will come by an abundance of god counsel and the courage to attack the opponent's weaknesses.

This one the thing I always notice when discussing this with liberals:

1) They don't even understand conservative ideas. This maybe why they don't think they have any.

2) They assume that any difficulty in life is a problem for government to address at some level, and that the only debate should be about how.

3) They assume that they would actually like the system they push. That the power they give government would somehow be benevolent even when a different regime takes over as is inevitable.

There are a lot more, but these are some of the issues that when discussed openly can lead to agreement with conservatives if both are open and honest.

We really do have a lot of shared values, that come out when people talk rather than fight.

The things we disagree about are basic and serious, but I feel confident on those positions and think the left is just wrong and many can be won over. I know that sounds arrogant, but talk it through and see. It's only talk. People tend to avoid getting into the basics with politics.

Alex: I'm not really a "lib", but I've been subjected to more smears at this site than almost all others. And, simply for pointing out obvious issues with the tea partiers. To a small extent that's constructive criticism, but to the wee tea party mind that doesn't process. It'd be great if the 0.001% of them who are sane and smart could help me with my issue; the problem is with the 99.999% who are vile, drooling idiots.

HDDepends on who runs -So given the rest of this response it doesn't really matter.

without any "how" attached to them.Spend less seems pretty simple. In fact the recent kerfuffle regarding extending unemployment benefits seems pretty simple "Show me where the money is and I'll vote for it"

DJ:But its amazing to me that Republicans don't even have the clarity of mind to straightforwardly ask them and debate the answers. Instead they act like pompous entitled thugs,

Do you really believe that; do really feel that applies to all Republicans? If so, you're not listening

Bags;Conservative ideas are counter-intuitive for most people.Gee, I'm a centrist and I agree. My mantra is unintended consequences

Alex;You fail to understand social cons. For them the whole abortion and gay issues are the "house on fire" for them. Uh ...I'm socially conservative (but I'm not sure I qualify as a SoCon)

LoneWack;predictable

Mick;I'd recommend starting your own country with you as its sole citizen and ruler, then all would be right with the world

I'm just saying that based on my knowledge of social conservatives, abortion, gays, sex-ed are #1 issues for them. They would rather be in poverty, but at least gay marriage will be illegal. These people are crazy fucks.

Depends on who runs - someone like Sarah..I'm just wondering if there ARE any ideas?

Sarah: I could while away the hours, conferrin' with the flowers Consultin' with the rain. And my head I'd be scratchin' while my thoughts were busy hatchin' If I only had a brain. I'd unravel every riddle for any individ'le, In trouble or in pain.

Alex and Lonewacko...Politics is not rational. It is emotional. Good old fashioned hate is the raw material that must be shaped into a usable work of art by a great politician. That job of using another's hate is a little like Jiu Jitsu. Take an opponent suddenly in the direction where he seems to be going using that to throw him to the ground. The artistic work of Sarah Palin (or is it her ghost writer?) lately has been noticed by all politicians. But she is from that tribe of women. Actually you guys and Ritmo make excellent points...it's just that good old fashioned hate lurks under the surface. Harry Truman once said something about hot kitchens.

If you run on your own ideas, voters know what they're getting. So if you win, and put your ideas into practice, nobody gets angry except the people who voted against you. If you run on a platform of "everything will be wonderful once those darned [insert party here] are out of power", you end up angering a whole lot of the people who voted FOR you.

So it seems to me that having your own ideas might make it harder to win at first, but makes it easier to stay in power.

HDHouse stepped in it: "nothing but tax cuts for the upper 5% come to mind...got something to add? how many is "plenty"? two, three, lots?"

One for every piece of legislation the Dems have rammed down our throats. Any more displays of ignorance?

"aside for setting a record for obstruction of debate, i don't think they have contributed much of anything."

Ooops, looks like you weren't quite done with the ignorance thing. Considering the Republicans didn't have votes to obstruct a thing for all of Obama's first year, I'd say you might be stupid instead of ignorant.

Why don't you tell everyone here just how the Republicans have obstructed anything. And while you're at it, you can explain how the party in charge having closed door meetings, voting to circumvent debate, and excluding Republicans amounts to Republicans obstructing a fucking thing.

Obama's speech writers have gifted Republicans mightily by labeling them the party that wants to take us backwards. All the Republicans have to say, and say over and over again, is "Hell yes we want to take America backwards, backwards to were it was before day one of Obama's reign." That would be a sure fired winner.

Free markets and liberty don't need "ideas" per say - they just need room.Free markets and liberty need the statists to die on the vine and get out of the way. Let people run their own lives without oppressive detrimental government.

Any Republican candidate who's campaign is 80% attack will get neither my support or my vote. I want a clear understanding of what the candidate is for as much as whom she (or he) is against. Above all, does that candidate have a deep commitment to less (massively) spending and smaller (orders of magnitude) Federal government? I will vote against the Washington Republican machine ("tell 'em anything, but vote to spend, spend, spend !") with a check in the libertarian box in a heartbeat if I think I am getting another run around. Keep in mind Republican Establishment, you can lose in 2010 and 2012 if you roll out the same party boys you have given us for the last 20 years. You might lose to Tea Party types or you may lose, again, to Democrats, but without a sea change in party attitude, you will lose. Any candidate, or supporting party, who equates corporatism with capitalism, considers "our Big Government" to be a good thing, who really can't find any place the budget can be cut, who considers a "little" tax increase to be OK or who really doesn't understand the myth of the Social Security Trust Fund (and/or lockbox) we don't need you, we don't support your agenda and we dont want you (mis)representing us in Washington. If your intent, the intent of the NRC, is to Rahmm us into another round of RINOs, well, "y'll be careful out there, ya heer!" That bus you see isn't a free ride to DC; it's to run you over if you attempt another hijack of conservative values and ideas!

My view is just being anti-Obama is enough policy. Pretty much everything that he has done since being elected has hurt the country. Ruined the economy. Greatly increased the recession. Voided the rule of law. Hired a tax cheat to run Treasury (which is over the IRS), the Clinton pardon bag-man to run the Justice Department as a racist fief, set the stage for destroying the American health care system and banking system, massively raised and raising taxes, broke most of his campaign promises, failed to respond quickly and appropriately to the BP oil spill (after taking a lot of their campaign contributions), etc.

Bruce Hayden said... My view is just being anti-Obama is enough policy. Pretty much everything that he has done since being elected has hurt the country."

Jesus Christ Bruce, where the hell have you been for the preceeding 8 years? Head up your ass or something? Bush and his cronies screwed this country nearly to death and its been Obama's job to clean up the absolute mess left him.

Jesus Christ Bruce, where the hell have you been for the preceeding 8 years? Head up your ass or something? Bush and his cronies screwed this country nearly to death and its been Obama's job to clean up the absolute mess left him.

You idiots on the right. You have zero sense of reality.

I suppose, in your reality, President Obama was never Senator Obama and a member of the majority in that august body. Further, I suppose that, since he wasn't a senator during the period you mentioned, he has absolutely no responsibility for Fannie and Freddy cratering, even after the administration sounded the warning bells, only to be smacked down by the Democrats who said, in essence, "move along, nothing to see here".

You seem completely unable to digest the simple (very simple) fact that criticism of one administration does not equal support of any other. You never have and probably never will, so thick is Kool-Aid in your veins.

On one side, I think that we could use another "Silent Cal", a low-key technocrat who honestly believed that most problems weren't his to solve. On the other hand, the web of sticky entangling horrors already draped across the commons of the private sector by those malicious spiders of statism needs *someone* to cut through the strands. As calming as Coolidge was, he didn't really handle Prohibition well, did he?

At least the Obama "reforms" aren't constitutional amendments, are they? Repeal is possible. Repeal is policy enough, I think.

It's funny how the Tea Party connects republicans with deficit reduction. If you look at the facts, they are anything but. Go ahead, look up deficit information per individual President. Then whine about how Reagan helped Clinton's deficit reduction by setting up the economy, while simultaneously claiming Obama has only himself to blame for the shit we're in now. Bush and the Republicans obviously had nothing to do with ANYTHING that troubles us now. Right wingers talk outta both sides of their mouths. Give more tax breaks to the rich, it'll help the economy. Where did I hear that before? Oh, in 1929 and 2007. Do those dates ring a bell at all? Never mind the increase in debt that Reagan piled on in the 1980's. What's good for business isn't necessarily good for the Country... i.e. because cheaper work overseas may help the bottom line, but it doesn't put food on the table for those who have lost manufacturing jobs... just to name one issue defining the competing interest of corporate America vs real America. I'm gonna laugh my ASS OFF when Harry Reid wins because the right wing tea baggers try to elect another looney tunes extremist, and the electorate has no other choice other than Reid...even if he does completely blow. The Tea baggers are gonna screw this next election outta the hands of the Republicans...Reid is a perfect example of how an idiot democrat looks GOOD next to the likes of someone like Sarah Palin and company.